11th District candidates Meadows and Rogers differ below surface

Rivals offer different ways to strengthen America

Published: Sunday, October 14, 2012 at 4:30 a.m.

Last Modified: Saturday, October 13, 2012 at 11:41 p.m.

Without a party affiliation next to their names, the two men vying for the 11th Congressional District seat might seem quite similar to an outsider.

Both Cashiers Realtor Mark Meadows, 52, and state Wildlife Commissioner Hayden Rogers, 41, have run their own small businesses. Both are pro-gun, pro-life and strong in their Christian faith. Both say they favor reducing federal regulations that stifle economic growth, and both oppose gay marriage.

The fact that Rogers is the former chief of staff for current U.S. Rep. Heath Shuler, a Blue Dog Democrat, helps explain the parallels. But while the two men agree in principle on many goals of the office, they have markedly disparate views on how to get there. And their backgrounds and philosophies about government also are very different.

A fiscal conservative and tea party favorite, Republican nominee Meadows wants to slash the size of the federal government, lower taxes across the board, promote free trade and increase resource extraction on public lands. If elected, he pledges to repeal Obamacare, reform Medicare and eschew earmarks.

Rogers, a “conservative Democrat,” casts himself in the independent-minded bent of his former boss. He sees education, job training and new infrastructure as the keys to America's success in the global economy, and he's an ardent foe of free-trade treaties that hurt manufacturers. If chosen, he promises to work across party lines to find common solutions.

The role of government

Meadows puts his faith in the free market and believes the federal government's role should be mainly limited to national defense, interstate highways and “making sure there are safety nets” to protect children, the poor and the elderly in times of need.

“As long as there's a purpose for it, and it moves us forward economically, that's where we need to be,” he said. “But every time we create a new federal program, like the Department of Energy has, it's been an abysmal failure. Yet, we continue to fund these things.”

He's taken heat from Rogers for saying during a tea party debate this past June that he wouldn't accept any federal grants for the district. Clarifying that position this past week, Meadows said he would accept federal funds “that support our first responders, law enforcement, the health, safety and welfare of our citizens.”

However, Meadows is staunchly opposed to federal earmarks, which is largely how former Rep. Charles Taylor and Shuler have brought home the bacon for WNC.

“If something is going to be appropriated, it needs to be for the country as a whole,” he said.

While agreeing that spending needs to be reined in, Rogers said the world's most successful nations “find a way to incorporate private-public and nonprofit partnerships that empower people and create an environment that allows businesses to thrive and prosper.”

Without federal grants, Rogers said, many rural communities in WNC wouldn't have hospitals, fire departments, roads, sewage treatment plants and a wide range of infrastructure necessary to lure industries and create jobs. Had the federal government not helped fund rural electrification in the 1930s, he said, “Western North Carolina would have struggled a lot longer.”

“Requiring people to continue paying their tax dollars, but not getting the benefit of it, this is an absurd notion,” he said. “Eliminating all federal grants, without thinking about how that affects our communities, is really troubling to me. Our focus should be on making sure those dollars are delivered and used as efficiently as possible.”

Debt and deficits

Both men call for balancing the federal budget. Meadows wants to start by amending the Constitution to require a balanced budget and through spending cuts. But that “really won't make a dent,” he said. “So we've got to grow our economy by 4 to 5 percent annually to start to tick away at the deficit.”

He said by leasing oil and natural gas rights on public lands, including untapped reserves in Colorado, Ohio and Pennsylvania, the royalties alone could produce $16 trillion, enough to eliminate the debt. Raising taxes of any kind would only plunge the country back into recession, he said.

Rogers agreed that the country cannot keep borrowing money and must tamp down deficit spending by reducing regulatory redundancies and cutting government waste. Though he supports increasing domestic oil and gas exploration, eliminating the debt will take more than oil and gas royalties, he said.

The problem can't be approached by “looking at things piecemeal,” Rogers said. “It really is going to take a bigger way of thinking that includes not only the revenue side, but the discretionary domestic spending side as well.”

No one party has the solution to the economic crisis, Rogers said, and both parties must work together. He said he's proven he can work across party lines, while “Mark is so ill-suited to be part of that solution. He's going to be one of those guys who's not willing to compromise or be part of the give-and-take.”

Meadows said, “I think we need to quit blaming others and start to come up with a plan. Regardless of whose fault (the deficit) is, step one is to stop the bleeding. And that requires making real cuts on a national level.”

Medicare

Meadows has voiced concerns that Medicare will go bankrupt by 2024 unless Congress steps in with major reform. He favors fixing the system by phasing in a premium-support model championed by Rep. Paul Ryan, which would affect those younger than 55 only. It would give seniors a set amount of money to purchase either traditional Medicare coverage or private health insurance.

Rogers said he “absolutely opposes any effort to voucher-ize or privatize Medicare.” He said nonpartisan analyses have found that dismantling the current Medicare system and replacing it with “vouchers” would cost seniors thousands each year. There are bipartisan ways of cutting the costs of Medicare without hurting beneficiaries, he said, including allowing Medicare to negotiate with drug companies to set prices and eliminating fraud.

Education

Meadows said he'd like to eliminate the U.S. Department of Education and break up its $69 billion budget into state block grants, which could be awarded to each locality as a per-pupil allocation. The parents of those students then could decide whether to spend that money on public, private or charter schools.

“If you truly make school choice a viable alternative, it makes every school compete for those dollars, and they all reach for higher academic excellence,” he said. “Do I ever see the competition being so great that public schools go away? No. I don't even see it coming close to that. Really, if they're getting a better education, wherever that is, that's what we need to encourage.”

Meadows and Rogers agree that the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 is seriously flawed. Both men said its intentions were good, but it lacks flexibility and puts too much emphasis on standardized testing. Meadows said he'd vote to eliminate the law “if it's not actually helping with higher standards.”

Rogers, who won the endorsement of the N.C. Association of Educators this month, said he is an “unwavering proponent of a public education system. I think it's the bedrock to future success, and it's truly the key to equal opportunity for all.”

Even though he favors bringing more power down to the local level, Rogers said forcing taxpayers to subsidize private or charter schools at the expense of public ones is wrong. He also believes there must be some federal standards for public schools, including colleges.

“Job opportunities are not limited to state lines,” he said. “We're competing with folks from all over the country and all over the world, and you have to have that ability to know there are minimum standards met.”

Meadows said he favors putting accountability in the hands of local school superintendents, not Washington bureaucrats.

Free trade

“I was not a big NAFTA fan,” Meadows said, because it creates “barriers” for entry on a number of things. But he supports free trade in general because he feels “we have the most productive and efficient work force in the world. The problem is, we're not competing on a level playing field.”

He favors reducing corporate taxes so American companies are not disadvantaged, and eliminating regulations such as overzealous mining safety laws and FDA inspections of pharmaceutical manufacturers that hamper trade. Meadows also opposes tariffs.

Rogers said Meadows has supported free trade agreements that have led to American jobs being shipped overseas. As part of Shuler's team, he said, “we voted against every free-trade agreement and pushed numerous pieces of legislation to help the manufacturing industry.”

“Mark has said that the federal government plays little or no role in job creation,” Rogers said. “This is actually a place where you need government to level the playing field. In the global economy, there has to be someone making sure that we are not being taken advantage of. That's not a role the private sector can fill.”

<p>Without a party affiliation next to their names, the two men vying for the 11th Congressional District seat might seem quite similar to an outsider.</p><p>Both Cashiers Realtor Mark Meadows, 52, and state Wildlife Commissioner Hayden Rogers, 41, have run their own small businesses. Both are pro-gun, pro-life and strong in their Christian faith. Both say they favor reducing federal regulations that stifle economic growth, and both oppose gay marriage.</p><p>The fact that Rogers is the former chief of staff for current U.S. Rep. Heath Shuler, a Blue Dog Democrat, helps explain the parallels. But while the two men agree in principle on many goals of the office, they have markedly disparate views on how to get there. And their backgrounds and philosophies about government also are very different.</p><p>A fiscal conservative and tea party favorite, Republican nominee Meadows wants to slash the size of the federal government, lower taxes across the board, promote free trade and increase resource extraction on public lands. If elected, he pledges to repeal Obamacare, reform Medicare and eschew earmarks.</p><p>Rogers, a “conservative Democrat,” casts himself in the independent-minded bent of his former boss. He sees education, job training and new infrastructure as the keys to America's success in the global economy, and he's an ardent foe of free-trade treaties that hurt manufacturers. If chosen, he promises to work across party lines to find common solutions.</p><p>The role of government</p><p>Meadows puts his faith in the free market and believes the federal government's role should be mainly limited to national defense, interstate highways and “making sure there are safety nets” to protect children, the poor and the elderly in times of need. </p><p>“As long as there's a purpose for it, and it moves us forward economically, that's where we need to be,” he said. “But every time we create a new federal program, like the Department of Energy has, it's been an abysmal failure. Yet, we continue to fund these things.”</p><p>He's taken heat from Rogers for saying during a tea party debate this past June that he wouldn't accept any federal grants for the district. Clarifying that position this past week, Meadows said he would accept federal funds “that support our first responders, law enforcement, the health, safety and welfare of our citizens.”</p><p>However, Meadows is staunchly opposed to federal earmarks, which is largely how former Rep. Charles Taylor and Shuler have brought home the bacon for WNC. </p><p>“If something is going to be appropriated, it needs to be for the country as a whole,” he said. </p><p>While agreeing that spending needs to be reined in, Rogers said the world's most successful nations “find a way to incorporate private-public and nonprofit partnerships that empower people and create an environment that allows businesses to thrive and prosper.”</p><p>Without federal grants, Rogers said, many rural communities in WNC wouldn't have hospitals, fire departments, roads, sewage treatment plants and a wide range of infrastructure necessary to lure industries and create jobs. Had the federal government not helped fund rural electrification in the 1930s, he said, “Western North Carolina would have struggled a lot longer.”</p><p>“Requiring people to continue paying their tax dollars, but not getting the benefit of it, this is an absurd notion,” he said. “Eliminating all federal grants, without thinking about how that affects our communities, is really troubling to me. Our focus should be on making sure those dollars are delivered and used as efficiently as possible.”</p><p>Debt and deficits</p><p>Both men call for balancing the federal budget. Meadows wants to start by amending the Constitution to require a balanced budget and through spending cuts. But that “really won't make a dent,” he said. “So we've got to grow our economy by 4 to 5 percent annually to start to tick away at the deficit.”</p><p>He said by leasing oil and natural gas rights on public lands, including untapped reserves in Colorado, Ohio and Pennsylvania, the royalties alone could produce $16 trillion, enough to eliminate the debt. Raising taxes of any kind would only plunge the country back into recession, he said.</p><p>Rogers agreed that the country cannot keep borrowing money and must tamp down deficit spending by reducing regulatory redundancies and cutting government waste. Though he supports increasing domestic oil and gas exploration, eliminating the debt will take more than oil and gas royalties, he said.</p><p>The problem can't be approached by “looking at things piecemeal,” Rogers said. “It really is going to take a bigger way of thinking that includes not only the revenue side, but the discretionary domestic spending side as well.”</p><p>No one party has the solution to the economic crisis, Rogers said, and both parties must work together. He said he's proven he can work across party lines, while “Mark is so ill-suited to be part of that solution. He's going to be one of those guys who's not willing to compromise or be part of the give-and-take.”</p><p>Meadows said, “I think we need to quit blaming others and start to come up with a plan. Regardless of whose fault (the deficit) is, step one is to stop the bleeding. And that requires making real cuts on a national level.”</p><p>Medicare</p><p>Meadows has voiced concerns that Medicare will go bankrupt by 2024 unless Congress steps in with major reform. He favors fixing the system by phasing in a premium-support model championed by Rep. Paul Ryan, which would affect those younger than 55 only. It would give seniors a set amount of money to purchase either traditional Medicare coverage or private health insurance. </p><p>Rogers said he “absolutely opposes any effort to voucher-ize or privatize Medicare.” He said nonpartisan analyses have found that dismantling the current Medicare system and replacing it with “vouchers” would cost seniors thousands each year. There are bipartisan ways of cutting the costs of Medicare without hurting beneficiaries, he said, including allowing Medicare to negotiate with drug companies to set prices and eliminating fraud.</p><p>Education</p><p>Meadows said he'd like to eliminate the U.S. Department of Education and break up its $69 billion budget into state block grants, which could be awarded to each locality as a per-pupil allocation. The parents of those students then could decide whether to spend that money on public, private or charter schools. </p><p>“If you truly make school choice a viable alternative, it makes every school compete for those dollars, and they all reach for higher academic excellence,” he said. “Do I ever see the competition being so great that public schools go away? No. I don't even see it coming close to that. Really, if they're getting a better education, wherever that is, that's what we need to encourage.”</p><p>Meadows and Rogers agree that the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 is seriously flawed. Both men said its intentions were good, but it lacks flexibility and puts too much emphasis on standardized testing. Meadows said he'd vote to eliminate the law “if it's not actually helping with higher standards.”</p><p>Rogers, who won the endorsement of the N.C. Association of Educators this month, said he is an “unwavering proponent of a public education system. I think it's the bedrock to future success, and it's truly the key to equal opportunity for all.”</p><p>Even though he favors bringing more power down to the local level, Rogers said forcing taxpayers to subsidize private or charter schools at the expense of public ones is wrong. He also believes there must be some federal standards for public schools, including colleges.</p><p>“Job opportunities are not limited to state lines,” he said. “We're competing with folks from all over the country and all over the world, and you have to have that ability to know there are minimum standards met.”</p><p>Meadows said he favors putting accountability in the hands of local school superintendents, not Washington bureaucrats.</p><p>Free trade</p><p>“I was not a big NAFTA fan,” Meadows said, because it creates “barriers” for entry on a number of things. But he supports free trade in general because he feels “we have the most productive and efficient work force in the world. The problem is, we're not competing on a level playing field.”</p><p>He favors reducing corporate taxes so American companies are not disadvantaged, and eliminating regulations such as overzealous mining safety laws and FDA inspections of pharmaceutical manufacturers that hamper trade. Meadows also opposes tariffs.</p><p>Rogers said Meadows has supported free trade agreements that have led to American jobs being shipped overseas. As part of Shuler's team, he said, “we voted against every free-trade agreement and pushed numerous pieces of legislation to help the manufacturing industry.”</p><p>“Mark has said that the federal government plays little or no role in job creation,” Rogers said. “This is actually a place where you need government to level the playing field. In the global economy, there has to be someone making sure that we are not being taken advantage of. That's not a role the private sector can fill.”</p>